Forum:Moved from Archer image dispute
::Moved from File talk:Jonathan Archer, 2155.jpg. First of all, Archduke, there is no reason to talk about me in the third person. That is rude. I am here. If you wanna address me, do so instead of this passive aggressive, condescending "she needs to know...scold, scold, put down, underhanded insult, scold". Second, if you care so much about procedure and apparently enjoy nothing more than throwing the book at me - aways assuming ill will - in addition to your underhanded insults, then let me remind you that the correct procedure for you law abiding editor would have been to not stoop to my lowly level of evil edit warring (which is clearly the only reason I do anything around here according to you) and instead actually read this discussion page and comment as to why you do not believe my assessment is correct. Had you done so, I would not have felt the need to keep reverting back , feeling that you purposefully disregarded my comments on the comment page, snubbing me for no other reason than your personal dislike for me and the grudge you are obviously carrying from the past, where i called you out on your inappropriate behavior - which included blocking people who disagreed with you and with whom you were engaged in a heated exchange personally. Finally, I did put it up to discussion and as you noted above (or not), I did say let's see what the community says. And I am fine with whatever the outcome is. I stated my point; others stated their point so that we can come to a resolution. Everyone has managed to stay polite and civil until you once again came in with the sole intention of just summarily opposing everything i say and then capping it with some subtly rude and underhanded remarks against me, turning this once again into some kind of a drama. It is a pleasure to see that nothing has changed and that you can manage to use every opportunity (read: editing controversy/issue) to unload nothing but a bunch of sneaky insults disguised in procedural wikia language at me. That being said, if the community believes (note: you alone do not constitute the community) the current image to be a better choice, then fine by me. Distantlycharmed (talk) 05:04, October 18, 2012 (UTC) :(Not to start another controversy, but the current image is Archer in 2154, not 2155.) - [[User:Aatrek|'Aatrek']] 10:57, October 18, 2012 (UTC) ::DC, you will continue to be treated like the troll you are until such time as you have proven through actions that you will no longer act as such. You have a long history of doing the same type of thing you just did in your above post, which is endlessly complain about the completely deserved consequences for your actions, and refusing to get the point. You've gone way out of your way to make sure we all know this, and since we've done this dance about this very image before, it seems to me like you knew exactly what you were doing when you reverted it again a few days ago with no explanation. Based on the history here, I would think you would have explained first if you weren't looking to cause a stir. ::That is correct Aatrek, but I couldn't revert to the image to the before the edit war, which is what should have happened when it became clear that was what was happening, without (more) cries of abuse of power, since it's an image I originally uploaded, and the other image is one I revert this to when DC kept changing it to the one she prefers, just like when we did this the last time. I would have preferred not to deal with this at all as an admin, for what I'm sure are obvious reasons, but a known troll like DC simply can't be allowed to use the wording of the policies to abuse the spirit of them. That left only the image from the wrong year, which is still a good image nonetheless. Either the file name will need to be changed if we're keeping this one, or the image can be revert back to one of the others we decide to keep, assuming that a "new" image isn't uploaded. - 17:50, October 18, 2012 (UTC) Archduke, it is very clear that you have long let your personal dislike for me cloud your judgment and that when you do respond to me on here, it rarely has anything to do with the subject at hand, but is always personal and in this demeaning "gtfo DC" attitude. I have made tons of valuable contributions to this site, expanding several articles and doing good work. For you to be summarizing and dismissing my presence and activities here on MA as trolling is supremely dishonest, constitutes a persona attack and proves my point even more. Just look at your track record with respect to your repeated condescending remarks regarding anything i do. You always assume ill will, always engage in personal attacks, abuse your admin privileges to block people who dont agree with you, or threaten a block when your arguments fail you and you got nothing more valuable to contribute in that regard. You are a bully. And let's stay with the facts for a moment here, since you do have this tendency to disregard those to try and justify your bully behavior: i did revert the image but i also started a comment explaining my change. I didnt just revert to troll and i alerted both you and Aatrek of the comment. The latter of whom reverted my file after you so I assume he was following your exemplary lead of great judgment and professionalism. You whine about and accuse me of edit warring when clearly you failed to follow procedure as you should and comment, instead of snubbing me and just reverting the image. And now that this is pointed out to you, you distract from your own incompetence and hostile behavior here by making this about me and try to actually justify why your bad attitude and actions are totally cool, justified and within parameters of proper admin or even leadership. Way to be. To even try to deny that is ridiculous. At east have enough character to own it. As you can see above, the only complaining I have done is regarding your unprofessional, accusatory and bully behavior. Until you budded in to do nothing but hijack the debate into a personal assault against me, everyone was doing fine with regard ot trying to come to a resolution. Last time we got into such a debate regarding your abuse of admin privileges which had to involve dragging people from wikia into this, all you did is go off on a full blown assault against me backed by nothing but your personal disdain for me. Yes, actions speak louder than words indeed. And I can see how much proper etiquette is rewarded here since apparently your personal attacks against me and name calling are without consequence to you. Dont bully and insult people and then when they fight back, accuse them of trolling. Distantlycharmed (talk) 16:47, October 22, 2012 (UTC) :::All right, I'm going to put you both on notice that if this conversation is not put back on track to the issue at hand and the personal comments not stopped, I will block the both of you because I have little interest in sorting out who did what or siding with one person or the other. Let's keep this discussion to the subject of the image. Thank you. 31dot (talk) 17:05, October 22, 2012 (UTC) ::With all due respect 31dot, I was on topic until DC felt the need to start trolling again by doing the same crap she does every time one of us doesn't roll over for her attitude and convoluted logic. If she's going to mischaracterize both the images in question and me, I reserve the right to correct that, and if you don't feel the need to sort this out, then I don't feel the need to abide by any block you place on me. I expect any block issued, to anyone, to be considered better than that. That said, DC's last post contains the same bullshit, and I will not justify it by calling it anything less than such or waste the thousands of characters pointing out how unbalanced she must be to even bring up half the things she does, like we weren't all there the last time and know what happened. We've spent far too long now refusing to do what clearly needs to be done since all other options simply don't work. Everyone on MA is expected to be able to have debates, heated or otherwise, without bringing up every little perceived slight every single time, so who here do you really think is the problem? ::You can move this where ever you like, but I'm not dropping this again. If we're not going to do what we keep saying we're going to do, why should anyone feel the need to play by the rules if all they have to do is wait a few months and just continue? - 18:36, October 22, 2012 (UTC) :::I believe part of an admin's responsibility is to maintain peace on the wiki, which is something that there isn't a lot of right now on that File talk page. Very little was being discussed about the legitimate issues raised there and both you and DC have spent time trading insults with each other. Correcting mischaracterizations is certainly a valid thing to do, (and you might be right, I'm not sure yet) but that is getting lost in the insults. :::I'm not convinced that it should be my job here to decide who was right and who was wrong- and even if it is, I consider this latest dust-up a continuation of past arguments between the two of you, not simply an isolated heated discussion. If I say that one of you was wrong, the other would simply say I was mistaken and provide me with past examples of how it was not their fault, and then be angry with me over how I addressed the issue. Perhaps I was too strong with my language and threatened actions, and for that I apologize, but I am tired of seeing these lengthy discussions between the two of you. It takes two to argue but only one to put a stop to it. I would truly rather it be one of you and not me. :::If one of you disagrees with the other's position, then argue the position. I don't want to see the name calling that has occurred thus far. 31dot (talk) 19:09, October 22, 2012 (UTC) ::No one here is more interested in ending this than me, because what little time I have for MA these days can be better spent doing anything else, but there is no solution here that is not going to piss someone off. You can't reason with people who hold unreasonable positions and refuse to get the point, and we're already tried to reason with DC, for well over a year, and it hasn't worked, because she is the "textbook" definition of a troll. Having another in depth discussion about this is what she wants, because it gives her the soapbox she needs to once again rant about how evil we all are and how much a victim she is. I'm not playing that game again, and I'm not going to let a troll loose on our talk pages just to "keep the peace". Like it or not, it is an admin's responsibility to decide who is wrong, if not right, in cases like this, and I expect the admins here, including you, to do so. I'm calling for her to be blocked, and to continue to be blocked for as long as it takes till she stops. In the passed "discussions" on this matter, she has been told time and time again by a number of people to stay on topic and not to continue to bring up passed, valid actions by people who disagree with her or there would be consequences, and you're right, only one of us has to be stopped, because only on of us keeps doing that. I only expect us to do what we said we would then, now that it called for. - 03:29, October 23, 2012 (UTC) :::If you want me to decide who was wrong here, I can- but I think that there is enough "wrongness" to go around and I don't have the time to analyze the discussion and determine who was wrong first- and if either of you wants me to, I can't guarantee you both won't be ticked off at me. You each want to prevent the other from "getting away" with anything- a recipe for conflict. While my initial threat was impulsive and over the top, I will block the next person to personally attack the other- starting now. I don't want to see this dispute continue any further. :::DC, that includes any response you might have to this. I am well aware of what you think about this issue, and no further response is needed. 31dot (talk) 12:17, October 23, 2012 (UTC)